[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20101110191117.GA30227@elte.hu>
Date:	Wed, 10 Nov 2010 20:11:17 +0100
From:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
To:	Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
Cc:	Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>,
	"Luck, Tony" <tony.luck@...el.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	ying.huang@...el.com, bp@...en8.de, tglx@...utronix.de,
	akpm@...ux-foundation.org, mchehab@...hat.com,
	Frédéric Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>,
	Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...hat.com>,
	Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...radead.org>,
	Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC/Requirements/Design] h/w error reporting
* Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org> wrote:
> On Wed, 2010-11-10 at 19:41 +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> 
> > We'll need to embark on this incremental path instead of a rewrite-the-world 
> > thing. As a maintainer my task is to say 'no' to rewrite-the-world approaches - 
> > and we can and will do better here.
> 
> Thus you are saying that we stick to the status quo, [...]
No, i'm saying we dont do new things just for the sake of it being new, without 
exhausting existing facilities.
None of the examples/arguments offered so far seemed to necessiate throwing away 
existing stuff.
> [...] and also ignore the fact that perf was a rewrite-the-world from ftrace to 
> begin with.
No, the thing is that there were no tools and no ABI - perf was mostly about the ABI 
and about the user-space tooling - ftrace didnt really have that (and oprofile had 
deep problems).
Thanks,
	Ingo
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
 
